Look What The Elected Scumbags Stuck On The Bailout Bill
From Taxpayers For Common Sense, a few choice special-interest turds hanging off it:
Sec. 503. Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children
Current law places an excise tax of 39 cents on the first sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any shaft of a type used to produce certain types of arrows. This proposal would exempt from the excise tax any shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means to enhance the spine of the shaft used in the manufacture of an arrow that measures 5/16 of an inch or less and is unsuited for use with a bow with a peak draw weight of 30 pounds or more. The proposal is effective for shafts first sold after the date of enactment. The estimated cost of the proposal is $2 million over ten years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.The Oregon senators were the initial sponsors of the provisions. According to Bloomberg News, the provision would be worth $200,000 to Rose City Archery in Myrtle Point, Oregon.
Here we have Oregon Scumbag One, and Oregon Scumbag Two. Kind of like Thing One and Thing Two in Doctor Seuss, only really oily and pandering.
I went on their sites, clicked up "contact me," and sent this message to each:
You vile panderer. Wooden arrows? How do you sleep nights, you oily creep?http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/10/02/look_what_the_e.html
I looked at Oregon campaign contributions and couldn't find any, either in the name of the company, Rose City Archery, or the owner, Jerry Dishion. Dishion told me he hasn't contributed to either senator, and that this measure was to correct an error in a law passed in 2004, when the cost of 30-cent children's arrows had a 43-cent tax tacked onto them. The cause was initially taken up by Oregon Congressman DeFazio, he said.
Dishion, who was very stand-up-guy-sounding on the phone, said that tax nearly put a bunch of businesses across the country (archeries, I think he said or meant) out of business.
Well, okay, not good, but I asked him if he was troubled that it was tacked onto the bailout bill.
"What difference does it make if a wrong is corrected what bill it's tacked onto?" he said.
Agree? Disagree?
The turd list continues:
Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility
Track owners want to be able write-off the cost of their facilities on their taxes over seven years - a depreciation timetable many of them have used for decades. But the IRS has wanted to stretch it to at least 15 years and has raised questions whether the increasingly popular tracks really belong in the same tax category as amusement parks.Auto track owners are simply trying to get out of paying more taxes - which they'd have to do if they deducted less every year. These owners have gotten plenty of tax breaks over the years from states and localities eager to get speedways. The provision would be extended 2 years till the end of 2009 and would cost $100 million. The provision encompasses all facilities including grandstands, parking lots and concession stands.
Sec. 308. Increase in limit on cover over of rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Extends until December 31, 2009 a rebate against excise taxes charged on rum imported from Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. A $13.50 per proof gallon excise tax is applied to distilled spirits imported to the U.S. Under this provision a $13.25 rebate is returned to PR and the VI, and is retroactive back to January 1, 2008. Permanent law sets the rebate at $10.50 per proof gallon, but the PR and VI provisions have generally been in place since the first Clinton Administration. The most recent extension of the $13.50 rebate expired January 1, 2008. Cost is $192 million.
Sec. 325. Extension and modification of duty suspension on wool products; wool research fund; wool duty refunds
The tariff relief (duty savings) is intended to benefit U.S. worsted wool fabric producers that use imported fibers and yarns as inputs, as well as U.S. tailored clothing manufacturers that use imported fabrics as inputs. This provision was originally introduced as a bill in December 2007 by Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Melissa Bean (D-IL). It extends current law provisions until 12/31/14, and in some cases to12/31/15. The 2010 to 2015 cost is estimated to be $148 million.
> "What difference does it make if
> a wrong is corrected what bill
> it's tacked onto?" he said.
It makes a difference.
It does.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at October 3, 2008 12:21 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/10/02/look_what_the_e.html#comment-1594985">comment from Crid [cridcridatgmail]I'm with you, Crid.
Amy Alkon
at October 3, 2008 1:48 AM
What's lost in all the noise about so-called "sweeteners" is that nothing passed the House yet. That's important, Constitutionally.
All fiscal bills MUST originate in the House of Representatives. No bailout bill was forthcoming from that institution.
So the only way the Senate can go first is to attach the bailout to a bill that the House has already passed.
Doesn't make either the bill or the bailout good or bad. Just makes it more fun to demagogue.
At this point, I think the time for quick repair is gone, and all that we can hope for is to survive it. Congress is still trying to save the foot, but the leg has died in the interim.
brian at October 3, 2008 6:12 AM
It seems to me that if it is an error correction, it doesn't matter where the hell it gets included. It's an error and needs to be fixed.
What appears to have happened is the Bloomberg author reported this and characterized it as a temporary extension and couldn't or didn't contact Dishion as you did.
George at October 3, 2008 6:39 AM
Isn't this blackmail? You didn't like the part we really want to pass ($700B, free and clear), so we'll add a bunch of your pet projects and this is your only chance to save them. If we don't get what we want, we'll kill your bill. Sounds like a ransom note to me. Where is that great principle about not negotiating with terrorists.
moreta at October 3, 2008 7:35 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/10/02/look_what_the_e.html#comment-1595077">comment from GeorgeWhat appears to have happened is the Bloomberg author reported this and characterized it as a temporary extension and couldn't or didn't contact Dishion as you did.
Lazy reporting, or lack of curiosity. I think it's rather important to know the circumstances of such legislation and whether there was a campaign contribution. And it's not like the guy is Michael Jackson, hiding from the press. I called, some friendly lady answered the line at the Archery, and put him right on the line. And I announced myself as a newspaper columnist, journalist, and blogger; it's not like I pretended I was calling from the local PTA.
Speaking of fact-finding, the Comptroller of the Currency got my complaint against B of A (about my investigation of their "security" measures that I believe lay their customers open to identity theft) on September 22, and has been sitting on it ever since. A woman there named Deshaundra told me "it has not been sent to bank yet" and it's "pending a review by our management." I was told I need to speak to Debra (or Deborah) Baker, the manager of customer relations, and left her a message. And this morning, their press officer, Dean DeBuck, called me back and I gave him an earfull. He (rather unhappily, I think) said he'd have to get back to me as to why my complain has gone NOWHERE. And I was frank with him about my worry about the fox guarding the henhouse: that the Comptroller used to be head of the banking lobby. Sigh.
UPDATE: Craig Stone from the Comptroller's office just called. Sounds really on-top-of-things, and said they sent it to B of A yesterday. No conspiracy, just the hurricane. Some of their employees lost their homes, tragically, so it's taken a while, longer than usual, to pass this on.
Amy Alkon
at October 3, 2008 8:04 AM
I've already become resigned to the fact that I will be paying for this bailout, but I have to admit I found the details surprisingly depressing. Not for the reason Amy and Crid cite, but because the little problems they are correcting are such incredibly stupid economic policy or micromanagement to begin with.
I mean the fact that we have a federal law that puts an excise tax of ...39 cents on the first sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any shaft of a type used to produce certain types of arrows... speaks to what a micromanaging socialist bureaucracy we've become. Wool duties and rum excise taxes sound like things Adam Smith figured out were bad ideas over 200 years ago. It's creationism for economics, only dumber.
Shawn at October 3, 2008 9:52 AM
Yeah, well, it passed, just got the word on MSNBC. Sheesh. o_O
Flynne at October 3, 2008 11:56 AM
flynne, from the story on MSNBC -
Pelosi spoke of “subjecting the spending of the federal government to the harshest scrutiny to remove waste, fraud and abuse.”
And that would include what? All the tacked on pork you had to bribe house members with to get this to pass? That's scrutiny? What a crock. Glad the Dems promised to cut all the pork when trying to get into office. What hypocrites.
wolfboy69 at October 3, 2008 12:59 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/10/02/look_what_the_e.html#comment-1595148">comment from wolfboy69Pelosi spoke of “subjecting the spending of the federal government to the harshest scrutiny to remove waste, fraud and abuse.”
Yes, they scrutinize it harshly to see where the best places to add earmarks might be.
Amy Alkon
at October 3, 2008 5:19 PM
As Glenn Reynolds said "They see everything as an opportunity for graft."
brian at October 4, 2008 5:56 AM
Leave a comment